Ankit @ Piyush v. State (Govt Of NCT Of Delhi)
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 2594/2015 ANKIT @ PIYUSH ..... Petitioner Through Mr Rohit Goel, Adv.
versus STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through Mr Hirein Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State alongwith Sub Inspector Komal Rathi Police Station Ambedkar Nagar, New Delhi
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA
O R D E R
% 03.05.2016 It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the complainant and petitioner were known to each other since the year 2013 and earlier they stayed together at House No.C-1st, 891, R.K. Chadhha House, Central Market, Madangir, Delhi and thereafter at RZ-58/B, Tughlakabad Extension, New Delhi from November 2013 to March, 2015. Certain photographs have also been placed on record to show that the petitioner and the complainant were visiting out of station also. It is further submitted that complainant was involved in a theft case and also remained in judicial custody and on coming to know this fact, the petitioner started maintaining distance from her. Out of frustration this FIR has been lodged.
It is further submitted that the petitioner has already joined investigation which fact is not disputed by learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. It is submitted by Investigating Officer of the case that the petitioner is no longer required for the purpose of investigation. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is ordered that in the event of his arrest:- (i) Petitioner be admitted to bail on his executing personal bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned I.O./SHO.
(ii) He shall join the investigation as and when called for by the I.O. (iii) He shall furnish his address as well as his contact number to the Investigating Officer.
(iv) He shall not threaten or coerce complainant or any prosecution witness. The application is accordingly disposed of.
Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the petitioner. SUNITA GUPTA, J MAY 03, 2016/rd